Karina Wilkinson v. Middlesex County Sheriff's Office (SPR 20201383)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records August 27, 2020 SPR20/1383 Malav Patel Records Access Officer Middlesex Sheriff’s Office Legal Division 400 Mystic Avenue Medford, MA 02155 Dear Mr. Patel: I have received the petition of Karina Wilkinson appealing the nonresponse of the Middlesex Sheriff’s Office (MSO) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, on June 22, 2020, Ms. Wilkinson requested “documents containing inmate calling service (ICS) provider phone rates and site commission percentage(s), as well as the current contract for inmate calling service in correctional facilities in the county” as well as “documents containing information on video visitation…” MSO responded on July 22, 2020, by providing the responsive documents in redacted form pursuant to Exemption (c). Unsatisfied with MSO’s response, Ms. Wilkinson petitioned this office, and SPR20/1383 was opened as a result. The Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A(d); 950 C.M.R. 32.03(4). “Public records” is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any town of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). It is the burden of the records custodian to demonstrate the application of an exemption in order to withhold a requested record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832• Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre • pre@sec.state.ma.us

SPR20/1383 Malav Patel Page 2 August 27, 2020 MSO’s July 22nd response In its July 22nd response, MSO states “In response to your request, enclosed please find all responsive documents. Certain information has been redacted from this record pursuant to G.L. c. 4, §7 cl. 26(c) which exempts ‘personnel and medical files or information; also any other materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy[.]’ The information redacted includes banking information, personal contact information, tax identification numbers and other materials relating to specifically named individuals that would constitute an invasion of privacy if disclosed.” In her appeal, Ms. Wilkinson states “I would like to appeal the redaction of the attached documents provided by the Middlesex County Sheriff's Office to my attached public records request.” Based on the foregoing, it is unclear what the basis of Ms. Wilkinson’s appeal is. Specifically, it is uncertain what portions of MSO’s redactions under Exemption (c) Ms. Wilkinson objects to. Ms. Wilkinson is reminded that all petitions for appeal “shall specifically describe the nature of the requestor’s objections to the response or failure to timely respond.” 950 C.M.R. 32.08(l)(f). Conclusion Accordingly, Ms. Wilkinson must describe her specific objections to the MSO’s July 22nd response. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Karina Wilkinson